ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2024
Exploring Perceptions and Practices of Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making Education in Palliative Care Settings.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards a conceptualisation of collaborative decision-making within interprofessional collaborative practice: a concept analysis using scoping review methodology.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Shared decision-making competency and its associated factors among palliative care nurses: a cross-sectional study in China.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Palliative care teams provide support to patients and their caregivers during terminal illness, which requires interprofessional collaboration. One of the foundational skills is to assist patients with decision-making. This can be facilitated through interprofessional shared decision-making (IP-SDM). So far, IP-SDM education frameworks have only been used to a limited extent in the area of palliative care. Aim: This study aims to explore perceptions and practices of faculty members, health professionals, and students toward IP-SDM education in palliative care and to indicate associated factors to implement an IP-SDM in undergraduate health professions education in palliative care settings. Methods: We used a cross-sectional study design in which the data was obtained via an online self-administered questionnaire adapted from existing validated tools. The questionnaire was distributed to faculty members and health professionals (n = 125) and students (n = 334) at King Abdulaziz Medical City in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The sampling technique was a non-probability convenience sampling. Bivariate statistics, such as independent sample Findings: The response rate was 54% (85 faculty members and health professionals and 164 students). Perceptions on IP-SDM did not differ between participants. From those who had previous experience with IP-SDM, the mean practices score was slightly higher for faculty members and health professionals (M = 83.1, SD = 15.9) than for students (M = 74.1, SD = 11.5), which was significant (p < 0.05). Factors such as gender, age, discipline, nationality, level of education, years of study, and previous experience that were associated with perceptions and practices were varied among participants. Conclusion: The findings show high levels of perception with low levels of practice of IP-SDM in palliative care. Other factors that could be associated with the topic should be addressed in further studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.